S R wrote:
I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.


My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains replaced by
5-car trains.

Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

What actually is the history of the 12 car networker thing? I recall
lots of platform lengthening happening at about the time the networkers
were coming in, but I wasn't really paying attention at the time? What
work was left undone that would have allowed 12 car trains, and what
were the originally intended routes for them?

Robin

R.C. Payne wrote:
S R wrote:

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.



My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform
length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains
replaced by
5-car trains.


Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

What actually is the history of the 12 car networker thing? I recall
lots of platform lengthening happening at about the time the networkers
were coming in, but I wasn't really paying attention at the time? What
work was left undone that would have allowed 12 car trains, and what
were the originally intended routes for them?

Robin

I still have the leaflets for the Networker launch. There is talk of
power supply upgrades required (where have I heard that since), longer
platforms, signaling improvements (later followed up by the Dartford
resignal ling. Use of longer trains (up to 12 coach), high power mode,
regenerative braking etc.

Chris

"R.C. Payne" wrote in message ...
S R wrote:
I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.


My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains replaced by
5-car trains.

Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

What actually is the history of the 12 car networker thing? I recall
lots of platform lengthening happening at about the time the networkers
were coming in, but I wasn't really paying attention at the time? What
work was left undone that would have allowed 12 car trains, and what
were the originally intended routes for them?

Robin

I can't give a list of what work was left undone, but I remember a lot
about the period. The Networkers were originally all going to be
units of four. The platforms were long enough for ten-car EPBs, but
the Networkers were going to have to be shorter (eight-car) if the
platforms weren't extended to allow for twelve.

But then three incompatible things happened.

1) The extension of all (most?) of the relevant platforms took place,
requiring Charing Cross to be closed for three solid weeks at one
point, and resulting in the disappearance of platform 7 at London
Bridge.

2) The order was changed to include two-car 466s, which meant that
there could be ten-car trains anyway.

3) The Networker trains, for a long time, were a maximum of eight
cars, and for many years the average length was shorter than the EPBs
had been.

The main result of the extended platforms has been to give the various
operators a good laugh watching people chasing short trains to the far
end of the platform.

Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

Victoria/Blackfriars-Beckenham Jn/Orpington

S R

"Chris Fribbins" wrote in message
...
R.C. Payne wrote:
MIG wrote:

James Looker wrote in message
...

Nick Lawford wrote:

"Peter Masson" wrote in message




There won't be enough 376s to displace Networkers completely from any
route.



There are more than enough to cover specific routes entirely.

36 units must be more than enough to cover a service such as Hayes or
Dartford via Greenwich (and excluding the obvious but silly answer of
Bromley North).

Surely both routes are entirely served from CS/CX so the short
platforms
issue does not arise.

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376
only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.

--
Nick



Bromley North has been using the new trains and they have also been
down to Orpington and Sevenoaks. The routes through Grove Park are
definetly getting all new Class 376 trains within the next year.



No one seems to have news of a drastic change in the diagrams that
would keep units on specific routes. That's why they can't be kept on
journeys they are best suited to. The are already doing some
"semi-fasts" via Woolwich and Lewisham.


I seem to recall having heard talk that (somehow) these trains were to be
kept off longer distance trips such as beyond Dartford, and people here
(on both uk.railway and u.t.l) pointing out how dificult that would be.
Have TPTB finally given up the idea of keeping them off Gillingham
services and the like?

Robin

They are diagrammed on the 17:46 from Cannon Street to Higham (Strood
when tunnel re-opens in January) every day at the moment - 2 x 5 cars. The
official line is that they will run to Gravesend in off-peak but may be
used on longer journeys to/from Gillingham in the peak (also Orpington
off-peak, Sevenoaks in Peak). In reality seats are likely to become
available at Dartford (Coastbound) or earlier if you walk through the
train (easier than most) and you will get a seat from longer out if you
are London bound - that is if you want one!.

Chris
I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham on
stock with no toilets?
This is just absured, it really is.
Aaron




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"S R" wrote in message
...

I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.

My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains replaced
by
5-car trains.

S R

Speaking of 5-car formations, I've noticed some nice new "5 car stop" signs
appearing near some of the platform monitors on these routes (surely they
could just use the "6 car stop" positions anyway? Seem incredibly efficient
to have started this already when there must be so many other tasks to do in
tidying up SET's scruffy stations)

Still no sign of toilets on my route (Sidcup line) which we were promised
*before* deployment of any 376 units. Having said that, some bizarre
looking 5-metre steel uprights have been embedded in the platform area of
Sidcup station on the Dartford-bound platform, either side of an existing
set of seats. This might be the beginning of a new structure that might be
toilets? Might be completely unrelated though...

Nick

(MIG) wrote in message . com...

1) The extension of all (most?) of the relevant platforms took place,
requiring Charing Cross to be closed for three solid weeks at one
point, and resulting in the disappearance of platform 7 at London
Bridge.

Westcombe Park stayed a 10-car platform station - not entirely sure
why, but one end of the station was at one point deemed some kind of
nature reserve, the other is the Blackwall Tunnel approach road.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the 12-car scheme was
abandoned because of falling passenger numbers. That could be rubbish,
though.

Aaron Borbora wrote:

I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham on
stock with no toilets?
This is just absured, it really is.


There's a precedent - they run from London Bridge to Tonbridge using
class 508s.

--
John Ray

On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 00:09:10 +0000, John Ray wrote:

Aaron Borbora wrote:

I can't believe this - are they seriously planning to run to Gillingham
on stock with no toilets?
This is just absured, it really is.


There's a precedent - they run from London Bridge to Tonbridge using class
508s.

a 508 *is* a toilet! :/

"R.C. Payne" wrote in message
...
S R wrote:
I can't see any reason why they'd diagram in such a way to be 376 only,
but it could be done in theory, which is why I assume the OP
asked the question.


My reason for asking was concern that routes limited by platform length
to
8-car trains would see all their peak-period 6- and 8-car trains
replaced by
5-car trains.

Which stations/routes are restricted to 8 cars? I might have been
sensible to have designed the 376s with selective door opening to permit
10 car working to these stations.

What actually is the history of the 12 car networker thing? I recall
lots of platform lengthening happening at about the time the networkers
were coming in, but I wasn't really paying attention at the time? What
work was left undone that would have allowed 12 car trains, and what
were the originally intended routes for them?

As others have mentioned, the suburban routes from Victoria and Blackfriars
are limited to 8 car trains, but there is no suggestion that 376s will be
diagrammed on these routes. This includes Victoria - Dartford, because of
short platfroms at Denmark Hill, Peckham Rye and Nunhead.

The abortive 12-car scheme included Charing Cross and Cannon Street to
Dartford (via all routes) and Orpington. I am not sure whether it also
included Dartford - Gravesend (and Gillingham?), and Orpington - Sevenoaks.
It did not include Bromley North (which had already become a self-contained
shuttle) or Lewisham - Hayes. AIUI it was abandoned because of a downturn in
London commuting in the early 1990s because of a recession, because the
works required at a few stations (Dartford, Lewisham, for example) was
proving seriously difficult and expensive, because the money wasn't there
for sufficient stock to run 12-car trains, and possibly because someone did
some calculations and found that a power upgrade (which hadn't been
budgetted) was needed.
Peter